Actors’ Power, Livelihood Assets and Participatory Forestry in Bangladesh: Evidence from the Sal Forests Area

K. K. Islam¹, Hyakumura Kimihiko^2*, Masakazu Tani³, Max Krott⁴, Noriko Sato¹

¹Forest Policy Laboratory, Kyushu University, Hakozaki, Higashi, Fukuoka, Japan.
²Institute of Tropical Agriculture, Kyushu University, Hakozaki, Higashi, Fukuoka, Japan.
³Faculty of Design, Kyushu University, Shiobaru, Minami, Fukuoka, Japan.
⁴Chair of Forest and Nature Conservation Policy, Georg-August University Gottingen, Buesgenweg 3, Germany.

DOI: 10.4236/ojf.2014.45B001                

Abstract

Decentralize in forest management policies towards more people-oriented approaches has become major policy trends in many of the world’s developing countries during the last decade. However, the power of important actors to misuse the participatory forestry (PF) approach for their self-interests has been stated as a main problem to success. So, this study attempted to identify the most powerful actors and the extent at which they influence the outcomes of PF, and also to measure the impact of PF on livelihood assets of participants. The empirical data were collected from the well-established PF programs at Madhupur Sal forests area of Bangladesh. The results showed that the forest department (FD) proved itself as the most powerful and influential actor in every element of power analysis in PF. Regarding to livelihood analysis, the results revealed that the overall value of participants’ livelihood assets was 0.85 and it was significantly differed from the non-participants value of 0.66. However, the development of human, physical and financial assets was not indicating a decent improvement like as natural and social assets of participants. So, it is necessary to pay more attention to boost up participants’ human and financial assets through intensive training and adopting proper tree-crop production techniques, and also ensuring alternative livelihoods approaches to the local people. In addition, the local government will need to pay more emphasis on constructing village roads and infrastructure so as to enhance physical assets of the local people. Finally, the study would recommend promoting PF with apposite government facilities and also empowering local participants in order to balance the power among different actors, and this will facilitate the participants in governing all of their development activities efficiently.

Keywords

Participatory Forestry, Actor, Power, Livelihood Assets, Sal Forests, Bangladesh

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Agarwal, A., & Gupta, K. (2005). Decentralization and Participation: The Governance of Common-Pool Resources in Nepal’s Terai. World Development, 337, 1101-1114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.04.009
[2]	Barrow, E., Clarke, J., Grundy, I., Jones, K. R., & Tessema, Y. (2002). Analysis of Stakeholder Based Natural Resource Management: Creating Space for Local People to Participate and Benefit? Natural Resource Perspectives (p. 320). Berkeley: University of California Press.
[3]	BBS (2006). Bangladesh Bureau of Statistics (BBS), Dhaka, Bangladesh. http://www.bbs.gov.bd/Home.aspx
[4]	Bond, A., Davis, C. N., Nott, K., & Stuart, G. (2006). Community Based Natural Resource Manual. WWF-World Wide Fund, 24-52.
[5]	Brown, F. P. (2009). Participatory Forest Management (PFM) Discourse in South Africa: Ecological Moderation in the Developing World. Ph.D. Thesis, Durban: University of Kwa Zulu-Natal.
[6]	Carney, D. (1998). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods; What Contribution Can We Make? London: Department for International Development.
[7]	Chen, H., Zhu, T., Krott, M., Calvo, J. F., Ganesh, S. P., & Makoto, I. (2013). Measurement and Evaluation of Livelihood Assets in Sustainable Forest Commons Governance. Land Use Policy, 30, 908-914. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.06.009
[8]	Devkota, M. (2010). Interests and Power as Drivers of Community Forestry: A Case Study of Nepal. Ph.D. Thesis, Germany: University of Gottingen.
[9]	FD (Forest Department) (2014). Land and Forest Area. Official Website of Bangladesh Forest Department, Government of Forest. http://www.bforest.gov.bd/act.php
[10]	Fometer, T., & Vermaak, J. (2001). Community Forestry and Poverty. Rural Development Forestry Network. Network Paper, Vol. 25h. Overseas Development Institute, UK, 1-8.
[11]	Hussein, K., & Nelson, J. (1998). Sustainable Livelihood and Livelihood Diversification. IDS Working Paper, No. 69. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies.
[12]	Islam, K. K., & Sato, N. (2012a). Participatory Forestry in Bangladesh: Has It Helped to Increase the Livelihoods of Sal Forests Dependent People. Southern Forest: A Journal of Forest Science, 74, 89-101.
[13]	Islam, K. K., & Sato, N. (2012b). Deforestation, Land Conversion and Illegal Logging in Bangladesh: The Case of the Sal Forests. iForest: Biogeosciences and Forestry, 5, 171-178. http://dx.doi.org/10.3832/ifor0578-005
[14]	Islam, K. K., Hoogastra, M., Ullah, M. O., & Sato, N. (2012). Economic Contribution of Participatory Agroforestry Program to Poverty Alleviation: A Case from Sal Forests, Bangladesh. Journal of Forestry Research, 23, 323-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11676-012-0260-6
[15]	Islam, K. K., Rahman, G. M., Fujiwara, T., & Sato, N. (2013). People’s Participation in Forest Conservation and Livelihoods Improvements: Experience from a Forestry Project in Bangladesh. International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, 9, 30-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21513732.2012.748692
[16]	Islam, K. K., Ullah, M. O., Hoogstra, M., & Sato, N. (2012). Economic Contribution of Participatory Agroforestry Program to Poverty Alleviation: A Case from Sal forests, Bangladesh. Journal of Forestry Research, 23, 323-332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11676-012-0260-6
[17]	Itubo, A. F. (2011). Power Dynamics within Community Forestry: Examples from Kenya. MSc Thesis, Germany: University of Gottingen.
[18]	Krott, M. (2005). Forest Policy Analysis. Dordrecht: Springer.
[19]	Krott, M., Bader, A., Schusser, C., Devkota, R., & Maryudi, A. (2013). Actor-Centered Power: The Driving Force in Decentralized Community Based Forest Governance. Forest Policy and Economics, in press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.04.012
[20]	Larson, A. M., & Ribot, J. C. (2007). The Poverty of Forest Policy: Double Standards on an Uneven Playing Field. Sustainability Science, 2, 189-204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11625-007-0030-0
[21]	Malla, Y. B. (2000). Impact of Community Forestry Policy on Rural Livelihoods and Food Security in Nepal. http://www.fao.org/docrep/x7273e/x7273e07.htm
[22]	Maryudi, A. (2011). The Contesting Aspiration in the Forests: Actors, Interests and Power in Community Forestry in Java, Indonesia. Ph.D. Thesis, Germany: University of Gottin-gen.
[23]	Muhammed, N., Koike, M., Haque, F., & Miah, M. D. (2008). Quantitative Assessment of People Oriented Forestry in Bangladesh: A Case Study from Tangail Forest Division. Journal of Environmental Management, 88, 83-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2007.01.029
[24]	Peluso, N. L., Tumer, M., & Fortman, L. (1994). Introducing Community Forestry: Annotated Listing of Tropics and Readings. Rome, FAO. http://www.fao.org/docrep/t3500e/t3500e00.htm
[25]	Ribot, J. C. (2004). Waiting for Democracy: The Politics of Choice in Natural Resource Decentralization. Washington DC: World Resource Institute.
[26]	Safa, M. S. (2004). The Effect of Participatory Forest Management on the Livelihood of the Settlers in a Rehabilitation Program of Degraded Forest in Bangladesh. Small-Scale Forest Economics, Management and Policy, 3, 223-238.
[27]	Shackleton, S., Campbell, B., Wollenberg, E., & Edmunds, D. (2002). Devolution and Community Based Natural Resource Management: Creating Space for Local People to Participate and Benefit? Natural Resource Perspective, 76, 1-6.
[28]	Shahbaz, B. (2009). Dilemmas in Participatory Forest Management in Northwest Pakistan: A Livelihoods Perspective. Human Geography Series.
[29]	Sobel, J. (2002). Can We Trust Social Capital? Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 139-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jel.40.1.139
[30]	Webber, M. (1964). Basic Concept of Sociology. New York.